Category for non-normative changes

[annevk]

We have "Meta:" and "Editorial:", but if someone makes a clarifying edit (e.g., whatwg/encoding#230) or adds an example, it might still be useful to have a prefix for others to know they can probably skip it.

Should we use "Non-normative:"? We use that in a number of places already.

[sideshowbarker]

I think a "Non-normative: " prefix is fine — but it seems worth considering that if there are some views of the commit descriptions which limit them to the first 50 characters, a prefix that takes up 16 characters leaves a lot fewer characters to use for the actual commit description. But maybe that’s not a real concern in practice these days.

[annevk]

We're okay with 72 characters per https://github.com/whatwg/meta/blob/master/COMMITTING.md. I wouldn't mind a shorter prefix though.

[domenic]

I don't have a strong opinion here, and can try to use anything people prefer. My weak opinion is that things are fine as-is; examples like the one given are not something I'd want to skip over.

[andreubotella]

"Clarify:" might work for clarifications, but not for examples. "Non-normative:" would be good enough, but I often struggle keeping my commit messages to 72 characters.

[not-my-profile]

I think it would indeed be very good to consistently categorize normative vs non-normative changes.
However I also agree that the prefix shouldn't be too long.

How about:

• norm: for normative changes
• info: for informative (non-normative) changes that are non-trivial (not just typo/grammar/link/style fixes)
• edit: for editorial (non-normative) changes (e.g. typo/grammar/link/style fixes)